HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Some funny things about the new CBA & small-market teams

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-29-2005, 06:23 PM
  #1
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Some funny things about the new CBA & small-market teams

1. Calgary, as one of the top 10 revenue making teams last year, will now have to fund other small market teams. Oh, and Iginla will be a UFA next year.
2. By the 2008 season, unresticted free agency will come to any who have 7 years of service, regardless of age. Ilya Kovulchuk will become a UFA at the ripe old age of 25. Heatly will be a UFA as well. Lots of luck keeping them.
3. Next year, both Chara & Redden will become UFA's.

Wasn't the CBA supposed help small-market teams?

True Blue is offline  
Old
07-29-2005, 06:53 PM
  #2
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,681
vCash: 500
The owners had to give up something--I seriously doubt that the players would agree to such a reduction in earning power without getting the right to free agency at an earlier age.

Brooklyn Ranger is online now  
Old
07-29-2005, 07:30 PM
  #3
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
2. By the 2008 season, unresticted free agency will come to any who have 7 years of service, regardless of age. Ilya Kovulchuk will become a UFA at the ripe old age of 25. Heatly will be a UFA as well. Lots of luck keeping them.
3. Next year, both Chara & Redden will become UFA's.

Wasn't the CBA supposed help small-market teams?
As I said during this entire CBA, it will be hysterical to hear the whining of fans of small market teams when their developing superstars split town in their mid-20s, just as they are entering their prime. You know, the same fans who claimed that the hardcap will spread NHL talent more evenly?

How do you spell "paaaaaaaaaarity"?

Trottier is offline  
Old
07-29-2005, 07:45 PM
  #4
barrel_master
Amber Heard
 
barrel_master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
1. Calgary, as one of the top 10 revenue making teams last year, will now have to fund other small market teams. Oh, and Iginla will be a UFA next year.
2. By the 2008 season, unresticted free agency will come to any who have 7 years of service, regardless of age. Ilya Kovulchuk will become a UFA at the ripe old age of 25. Heatly will be a UFA as well. Lots of luck keeping them.
3. Next year, both Chara & Redden will become UFA's.

Wasn't the CBA supposed help small-market teams?
It still does help 'small market' teams. Yes, Kovulchuck will be UFA by 25 and may be lost but in all seriousness, he may have been lost anyway under the old system too.

Sure, it's not perfect for 'small market' clubs but it's still better then what it was before.

barrel_master is offline  
Old
07-29-2005, 08:59 PM
  #5
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrel_master
Yes, Kovulchuck will be UFA by 25 and may be lost but in all seriousness, he may have been lost anyway under the old system too.
There is a HUGE difference between being lost at 31 and being lost at 25.

True Blue is offline  
Old
07-29-2005, 09:25 PM
  #6
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrel_master
It still does help 'small market' teams. Yes, Kovulchuck will be UFA by 25 and may be lost but in all seriousness, he may have been lost anyway under the old system too.

Sure, it's not perfect for 'small market' clubs but it's still better then what it was before.
Except now, instead of having to trade a player like Kovulchuck, he will become a free agent and the team losing him won't even get several warm bodies to fill the roster in return.

Yep, it works great for small market teams.

Brooklyn Ranger is online now  
Old
07-29-2005, 09:28 PM
  #7
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
3. Next year, both Chara & Redden will become UFA's.

Wasn't the CBA supposed help small-market teams?
Not to mention Hossa, good luck trying to fit all 3 under the cap.

John Flyers Fan is offline  
Old
07-29-2005, 11:02 PM
  #8
barrel_master
Amber Heard
 
barrel_master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklyn Ranger
Except now, instead of having to trade a player like Kovulchuck, he will become a free agent and the team losing him won't even get several warm bodies to fill the roster in return.

Yep, it works great for small market teams.
I'm sorry but I still belive that the new CBA is better for 'small market teams'.

True, the UFA moves down but, in the past, teams didn't loose players just because of UFA. Very often teams traded guys for unproven players way before their UFA date because they realized they couldn't keep their salary anymore.

Miroslav Satan 23, Buffalo Sabres traded Craig Millar and Barrie Moore to the Edmonton Oilers for Miroslav Satan.
Jeremy Roenick 26, Phoenix Coyotes traded Alexei Zhamnov, Craig Mills and 1st round selection (Ty Jones) in 1997 to the Chicago Blackhawks for Jeremy Roenick.
Michael Peca 26, Buffalo Sabres traded Michael Peca to the New York Islanders for Tim Connolly and Taylor Pyatt.

Fair enough, this is a selective list but the point is that with a salary cap in place players and other teams won't be able to inflate salaries to the point where 'small market' teams won't be able to keep their star players (ufa, rfa, signed) or at least retain leverage during trades so that they can get more in return.

Don't get me wrong though, I'm a Rangers fan and I'm not trying to put down the club. All I'm trying to say is that this new CBA will be better then the old one for 'small market teams' and in that sense it does 'help them'.

barrel_master is offline  
Old
07-29-2005, 11:13 PM
  #9
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrel_master
All I'm trying to say is that this new CBA will be better then the old one for 'small market teams' and in that sense it does 'help them'.
Please explain how Boston loosing Thorton, Tampa loosing Lecavalier & St. Louis, Calgary loosing Iginla and Atlanta loosing both Heatly & Kovulchuk helps the small-market team. And make no mistake about it, unless the respective teams offer these guys the max, how on Earth are they going to keep them?

True Blue is offline  
Old
07-30-2005, 09:10 AM
  #10
barrel_master
Amber Heard
 
barrel_master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Please explain how Boston loosing Thorton, Tampa loosing Lecavalier & St. Louis, Calgary loosing Iginla and Atlanta loosing both Heatly & Kovulchuk helps the small-market team. And make no mistake about it, unless the respective teams offer these guys the max, how on Earth are they going to keep them?
I've seen people make the point that because Boston, Tampa, Calgary and Atlanta might loose players the CBA must be bad for all small market teams. I don't belive that they'll neccesarily lose these players they can, like you said, offer the max or some other amount that's relatively high. Even if they do loose them, it's only bad for the teams mentioned, you talk as if teams like Atlanta are representative of teams such as Nashville, Chicago or Edmonton... the downwards slary suppression will help with a number of second teir players that small market teams want to keep. All the teams you mentioned have something in common with some 'large market' clubs, they're overloaded with talent and just like the 'large market clubs' the teams you mentioned must manage their skill properly. As part of that, who's going to offer these guys max contracts? Many 'large market' teams like TO, Col, Det will have CAP issues for years (my rangers are an exception ) and it's unlikely that these players will be pulled by any of these teams... more likely it's a 'small market' team with some space that will be able to lure these players.

But it seems that we simply won't be able to agree on this matter. Basicly, my point is still that this CBA will, in general, be better for 'small markets' then the last CBA.

barrel_master is offline  
Old
07-30-2005, 07:58 PM
  #11
Burberry Manning
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Summit NJ-The Elite
Country: United States
Posts: 2,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrel_master
I've seen people make the point that because Boston, Tampa, Calgary and Atlanta might loose players the CBA must be bad for all small market teams. I don't belive that they'll neccesarily lose these players they can, like you said, offer the max or some other amount that's relatively high. Even if they do loose them, it's only bad for the teams mentioned, you talk as if teams like Atlanta are representative of teams such as Nashville, Chicago or Edmonton... the downwards slary suppression will help with a number of second teir players that small market teams want to keep. All the teams you mentioned have something in common with some 'large market' clubs, they're overloaded with talent and just like the 'large market clubs' the teams you mentioned must manage their skill properly. As part of that, who's going to offer these guys max contracts? Many 'large market' teams like TO, Col, Det will have CAP issues for years (my rangers are an exception ) and it's unlikely that these players will be pulled by any of these teams... more likely it's a 'small market' team with some space that will be able to lure these players.

But it seems that we simply won't be able to agree on this matter. Basicly, my point is still that this CBA will, in general, be better for 'small markets' then the last CBA.
Exactly. Just because players like Kovalchuk, Heatley, Iginla, and Vinny reach their UFA status earlier doesn't mean that they are guarenteed to leave like they were in years past. Now these players have an upper limit on possible salary figures and teams have a cap on the money they have available to throw at them. Sure, everybody is going to be interested in acquiring Heatley but will they be able to work his 7.whatever million into their cap structure? And is 7 million too extreme a figure for Hotlanta to match(in years past it might be 10 or 11 mill)? I dont think so.

Burberry Manning is offline  
Old
07-30-2005, 09:41 PM
  #12
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,609
vCash: 500
The idea is for all teams to be on a level playing field for the UFA's. Yes, Kovalchuk, Heatley, Iginla, Thornton etc, will likely get close to the max salary when their time comes, but if the Rangers can offer 7.5MM, so can the thrashers and flames. Atlanta is screwed in that they will have both heatley and kovalchuk and will likely only be able to keep 1. However, by that time someone will figure out how to get around the cap. I forget where I saw it, but you could have the Rangers pay Kovalchuk $1MM per season to play, but also give him a $10MM/year contract to be a spokesman for Cablevision.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:27 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.